In the mid 1980s two particular events made an impact on the American wine business: one was dubbed The French Paradox; the other was a new federally mandated government warning label. At first glance, the two may not have seemed related, but they were.

The French Paradox was the title of a Morley Safer segment on 60 Minutes claiming the French consumed more artery-clogging food than Americans, yet they suffered less from heart disease. The explanation for this paradox was supposedly the beneficial health effects of chemicals found naturally in red wine, which at the time the French consumed far more than Americans. Americans immediately raced to their favorite retail shop for red wine; there, they saw a newly affixed government-mandated warning on the label.

The overall wine industry complained that the wording of the warning was both misleading and largely based on incomplete scientific evidence: for instance, the statement "contains sulfites" neither addressed who is at risk (according to the science, a percentage of asthma sufferers) nor did it explain the volume in solution that may or may not create the risk.

It particularly irked the wine industry that while the government warning seemingly meant to scare consumers, wineries were prohibited by regulation from making claims on their labels that point to beneficial effects of moderate wine consumption, even when scientific evidence like the one reportedly behind the French Paradox could be cited.

Thirty years on, about an equal number of scientific studies have pointed to benefits from moderate wine consumption, but the wine industry must remain mute. At the same time, new labeling mandates may be in the offing.

Earlier this year the alcohol conglomerate
Diageo, which has in its portfolio Sterling Vineyards, Rosenblum Cellars, and Beaulieu Vineyard, committed to voluntarily listing calorie content on its wine labels, with a promise to soon add voluntary nutritional information. And two weeks ago, another large beverage alcohol company, Treasury Wine Estate, owner of Beringer Vineyards, Stag’s Leap Winery, Chateau St Jean, Lindeman’s, Penfolds, Wynn Coonawarra Estate, Rosemount Estate, and many other wine brands, announced the inclusion of calorie content on its wine labels.

These commitments are voluntary because, unlike food, wine has escaped ingredient/nutritional labeling requirements. In the United States the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) has no regulatory jurisdiction over wine. Excise taxes make wine the purview of the Treasury Department's Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB).

Rumors float that USDA seeks regulatory authority over wine labels. Thus far, TTB maintains control, only encouraging wine producers to voluntarily list nutrition and ingredients on labels. Some in the American wine industry, like Randall Grahm of Bonny Doon Vineyard have done so, but most still balk. Across the pond, where American warnings were thought to be nuts in the 1980s, European Union regulators today show signs of embracing nutritional/ingredient labeling; some have raised a glass to Diageo's decision. It seems only a matter of time before the labeling becomes widespread, which scares small American wineries.

Filled with many natural components, wine is complicated. Also, TTB allows dozens of additives in wine to stabilize, flavor, color, balance, and fix problems. Ingredient labeling can be a nightmare for wineries with limited resources. Smaller wineries say all they need to be overburdened by new labeling mandates is a new vintage year, because the complicated component mix varies from vintage to vintage. To them, nutrition/ingredient labeling compliance would become a financial drain.

Aside from sulfites, the other ingredient TTB already mandates on labels, alcohol, is largely responsible for the calories in wine. But TTB allows a labeling variance of 1.5% plus or minus for wines below 14% alcohol by volume (ABV). In other words, wine labeled 12% ABV can be as low as 10.5% or as high as 13.5%. I'm left to wonder how that would reflect caloric labeling accuracy.

In case you are wondering: depending on its style and ABV, six ounces of wine delivers anywhere from 100 to 200 calories. Maybe we should just pick the number that makes us happy.